Tony Finch wrote:
You seem to be repeating my point that if the spec requires an
NXDOMAIN check then an implementation cannot be stricter if it
wishes.
I'm not sure about your statement. Of course receivers can check
whatever they like. They just have no business to say "nxdomain"
when they got "nullmx", "SPF FAIL", or anything else that is not
the same as "nxdomain".
I am talking about checks such as recognizing MX 0 . or treating
MX-points-to-RFC1918 as invalid.
Arguably these checks are fine, but they are no part of ADSP, and
I don't get why anybody would wish to say "ADSP result nxdomain"
when it actually is some kind of "bogusmx". Why not simply reject
"bogusmx", and don't bother to check ADSP ?
Frank
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html